Oppose Government Coerced Electrification: Don’t Give National Grid a Monopoly Over Home Heating In Town:

Westford Voters will be asked to approve the adoption of the so-called “specialized code” at this year’s fall town meeting.  Article 2 represents yet another step toward the ultimate forced electrification of residential housing in town. It will require all new homes built in Westford to install pre-wiring systems and solar panels as a prelude to forced electrification, and it will subject homeowners to variable and ad hoc regulatory mandates issued by state officials.  The article should be opposed because it will impose government coerced costs on residential housing; create a monopoly on residential heating and dependence on an unreliable and predatory service provider.  It places an excessive burden on Westford residents in pursuit of very negligible climate goals.

Proponents admit that the mandate requiring pre-wiring and solar panels in all new homes will increase the total construction cost by 2 to 3%.  In a state that is desperately seeking to increase its affordable housing stock, this requirement will, as Governor Charlie Baker once said; “ kill new housing construction in its tracks.” The article is also being pushed during an energy crisis declared by Governor Healey caused by excessive energy costs negatively impacting residents in the state.  Electric rates in Massachusetts are among the highest in the nation.

The specialized code will ultimately to mandated electrification.  It sets up the potential for the monopolization of residential heating by one provider, National Gid. This corporation was recently subject to an appeal issued by the Governor to repay 1.5B in overcharges to rate payers. Because this proposed bylaw limits the opportunity of consumers to shop for the most cost-effective products in the market, it violates the basic fundamentals of a free market. It will also makes us vulnerable to a single point of failure. National Grid’s infrastructure is in need of significant upgrades and is vulnerable to cyber-attack. The company also relies on the volatile global LNG market for the fuel to power its’ grid. During a recent presentation to the Planning Board, article proponents offered that electricity would be cheaper than gas. However, when reminded that electric power was driven by gas, they could not explain if spikes in gas prices would ultimately impact electric rates. They will.

Proponents claim that the increased costs of the program will be offset by incentives provided by Mass Save. That is hardly reassuring.  Mass Save is one of several state agencies rocked by corruption.  A Rockland contractor recently swindled the program out of 8M dollars.  The legislature and state oversight agencies want to pare back its budget.   House Bill #5151 seeks to cut 1B from its 5B budget.  The state’s Department of Utilities rejected its budget calling for a 5M reduction because of soaring costs.  A state audit revealed that Mass Save has had a disproportionate impact on poorer communities, favoring wealthier communities through a bias in reimbursements to those with electric heat over gas, oil and propane.

Perhaps the biggest argument against Article 2 is offered by the Governor herself.

Facing significant political pressure from ratepayers, the Governor, once an alternative energy warrior, has backed off and is now calling for an “all above” energy policy.  Healey committed one of the most dramatic reversals in recent state political history, when she petitioned the Trump administration to expedite the installation of gas pipelines into Massachusetts; pipelines that she worked to kill when she was Attorney General.   The movement to ban fossil fuels is a political sinking ship.  The days where climate warriors can wantonly punish the residents of Massachusetts, a state emitting 56.8M tons of carbon emissions annually, while ignoring China’s 13B tons of annual emissions maybe over.  How ironic, if it was Governor Healey who let the wind out their sails.

STATE BALLOT QUESTION RUNDOWN:

Detached State Legislature; Ideological Struggles, Force Issues To Referendum

This fall state voters will be presented with a menu of significant referendum issues to decide.  The issues are wide and diverse and several are very significant.   Citizens are moving to the referendum process because the legislature has devolved to such a low point of performance,  more concerned with protecting its own agenda, than addressing the needs of its constituents. This is why we have such a wide array of issues.   Here is IZON’s take on these issues and recommendations for your consideration:

Question # 1: This is an initiative that seeks to extend open meeting law and open records law requirements to state government.  The legislature conveniently left themselves out of these laws when they were originally passed.  IZON recommends a YES vote

Question # 2: CPCS Enforced Bargaining Rules:  This would extend collective bargaining rights to attorney’s, who are affiliated with the state’s Committee For Public Counsel.  These are the public defenders.  While pay for these positions has been substandard, owing to legislative negligence, it is not a good idea to create another public employee union, that would have the potential to shut down the criminal court.  IZON recommends a NO Vote

Question # 3:  All Party Primary: This is the most deceptive ballot question of all .  This is rank choice voting coming back under another guise.  This is a mechanism by which the status quo in this state, seeks to curb any meaningful opposition. It is bad enough that they have co-opted the state Republican party. This question, if passed, would impose an insurmountable obstruction on any potential reform movement, that might try to restore power to the people.  If this passes, this election will be the last authentic one for Massachusetts for many years to come.   Vote: NO NO NO !

Question 4:  Same Day Voter Registration:  This is a bad policy which directly threatens the integrity of the voting process.   Our town clerks are overwhelmed already attempting to ensure the integrity of the voting process.  This measure would break their backs.   IZON has no sympathy for some fool who decides to wake up one morning and vote.   Go register as a voter.  Don’t be fooled by the increased participation scam pushed by the status quo.  IZON recommends a NO vote.

Question # 5:  Return Excess Revenue To Taxpayers: The logic here is simple.  State tax money Is your hard earned money.  If government can define a purpose for it that has been approved, the money should be applied. When they have money left over, there should be an obligation to give it back.  Vote YES.

Question # 6: All Nature Fund: On the surface, sounds like a great idea, more money for parks and recreation without taxes. The rub here is that it creates a board to oversee the funds taken in by fees and grants. Experience shows that in Massachusetts such boards will eventually become slush funds. Vote NO.

Question # 7:  Mandate Smaller Building Lots: In theory the idea is a good one. As everything in  Massachusetts, the practical application is double sided.   This would allow the state to set local zoning laws.   Bad move, because it places your property values in jeopardy.  This could have been done another way, such as, guaranteeing more local aid for those communities who set up zones that can accommodate this density. IZON Recommends a NO Vote

Question #8  Modify State Commercial Marijuana Laws: If passed this would outlaw commercial sales on marijuana while preserving medical use.  The argument for legalization was to bring revenue into the state and to curb incentives for illegal sale.  The problem is that the State Cannabis Commission is riddled with corruption and incompetence, and illegal sales continue because the level of THC in the legal product doesn’t provide the higher kick as the illegal one does.  Additionally, the legislature has refused to make possession of an unsealed package of marijuana in a vehicle illegal.  At this time, pending the development of improved testing, that is the only way to curb driving under the influence of marijuana to some extent.  Additionally, the Cannabis Commission is now licensing pot cafes, this will increase the risk of impaired drivers. IZON recommends a YES vote

Article # 9:   More Gun Law Restrictions:   This is another effort through an administrative back door to restrict second amendment rights.  The last thing Massachusetts needs now is more gun laws.  We are the most heavily restricted state in the union.  A private gun owner assisted a state trooper on Memorial Drive in neutralizing a man randomly shooting at cars with an automatic rifle and a father neutralized a mass shooter in Oregon.  Defend the second amendment.  Vote NO.

Do you see a pattern here ? At the core of IZON’s responses to the ballot questions is a deep and fundamental mistrust of state government.   It was Mark Twain, who once said that the only true criminal class in the United States was Congress.  Based on many years of experience with Massachusetts government, I believe the same can be said about Beacon Hill.  Vote for Mike Minogue for Governor and support Auditor Dianne DiZoglio’s courageous effort to audit the legislature. They are the only real hope we have.